tempo_create_account

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description meaningfully explains the confirmation flow: a native confirmation prompt where supported, otherwise a two-phase preview/confirmToken fallback. This goes beyond the annotations, which only indicate mutation/destructive potential, and gives the agent critical interaction context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences carry the full purpose and the non-obvious confirmation behavior. The content is front-loaded and every word earns its place; no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description is complete for selection and invocation: it states the action, covers the confirmation behavior, and the schema covers all 9 parameters and their constraints. The only minor gap is that it does not describe the final success response, but with no output schema this is a small omission.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter, including confirmToken's special role. The description adds a useful high-level view of the confirmation flow but does not add new per-parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with 'Create a new Tempo account,' which names a specific verb and resource. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like tempo_update_account and tempo_delete_account, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description makes the intended use evident: use this tool when creating a new Tempo account. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion conditions, but the verb 'create' plus the sibling set gives clear contextual guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.